Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Why don't you answer the intelligent questions I have put forth about the funding?I know all those scientists know the sow's big tits when they see them. And snuggle in and start suckling like the piglets they are.You think YOU know better than all of these scientists, huh? You're a fucking arrogant prick.
What are you if you aren't a Republican?
Sort of like the media isn't corporate owned and controlled, you sure seem to smell like a duck, look like one, walk like one.
Are you a libertarian? Those are just people too embarrassed to admit they are Republicans.
Why wasn't it privately funded, if it were so vital? If it was so good? Eight years, they could have raised BILLIONS for it in Hollywood alone.Two things:
1.) What I posted aren't feelings, or opinion. They are facts.
2.) I am not, and have never been, a Republican. I'm not even right wing. Which makes you ignorant.
But, I already said that earlier.
One last thing: The scientists who roared? Hell, I'd roar too if I just heard that billions in taxpayer funds is coming my way for crap we don't need.
You don't think we need it but then again, you are in the minority now, so stfu.
And all of this is lost on these sycophants, because they're not using their MELONS!Why wasn't it privately funded, if it were so vital? If it was so good? Eight years, they could have raised BILLIONS for it in Hollywood alone.You don't think we need it but then again, you are in the minority now, so stfu.
Here's the real kicker; if federally funded research does lead to some type of advancement or cure in some disease, this will be sold for pennies on the dollar to a company that will charge us billions for the use of those advancements even though said private company didn't put the money into the research. So taxpayers fund the research so they can pay astronomical fees for any positive results gained from that research. Talk about corporate welfare.
Why wasn't it privately funded, if it were so vital? If it was so good? Eight years, they could have raised BILLIONS for it in Hollywood alone.You don't think we need it but then again, you are in the minority now, so stfu.
Here's the real kicker; if federally funded research does lead to some type of advancement or cure in some disease, this will be sold for pennies on the dollar to a company that will charge us billions for the use of those advancements even though said private company didn't put the money into the research. So taxpayers fund the research so they can pay astronomical fees for any positive results gained from that research. Talk about corporate welfare.
Why wasn't it privately funded, if it were so vital? If it was so good? Eight years, they could have raised BILLIONS for it in Hollywood alone.
Here's the real kicker; if federally funded research does lead to some type of advancement or cure in some disease, this will be sold for pennies on the dollar to a company that will charge us billions for the use of those advancements even though said private company didn't put the money into the research. So taxpayers fund the research so they can pay astronomical fees for any positive results gained from that research. Talk about corporate welfare.
That would be true under GW's free market capitalism, but not under the Dems.
Here's the real kicker; if federally funded research does lead to some type of advancement or cure in some disease, this will be sold for pennies on the dollar to a company that will charge us billions for the use of those advancements even though said private company didn't put the money into the research. So taxpayers fund the research so they can pay astronomical fees for any positive results gained from that research. Talk about corporate welfare.
That would be true under GW's free market capitalism, but not under the Dems.
You're completely under the spell!
You think YOU know better than all of these scientists, huh? You're a fucking arrogant prick.
Nice to see one of you Obamaphiles admit you've given up any idea of rational thought.That would be true under GW's free market capitalism, but not under the Dems.
You're completely under the spell!
You betcha.
You think YOU know better than all of these scientists, huh? You're a fucking arrogant prick.
What a typical Liberal way of responding to disagreement.
"In all fairness, adult stem cells have restricted differentiation potential and do not proliferate as well as ESC. On the other hand, while ESCR yields, at best, meager results, and has only far distant possibilities of successful clinical applications, current clinical applications of adult stem cells are abundant! They include treatments for the following: corneal restoration, brain tumors, breast cancer, ovarian cancer, liver disease, leukemia, lupus, arthritis, and heart disease. Thousands of patients are treated and cured using adult stem cells. Alternative sources for adult stem cells include: placenta, cord blood, bone marrow organ donors, and possibly fat cells."
First, one minor complication is that use of human embryonic stem cells requires lifelong use of drugs to prevent rejection of the tissue. Second, another more serious disadvantage is that using embryonic stem cells can produce tumors from rapid growth when injected into adult patients. A third disadvantage reported in the March 8, 2001, New England Journal of Medicine was of tragic side effects from an experiment involving the insertion of fetal brain cells into the brains of Parkinson's disease patients. Results included uncontrollable movements: writhing, twisting, head jerking, arm-flailing, and constant chewing. Fourth, a recent report in the Journal Science reported that mice cloned from ESC were genetically defective. If human ESC are also genetically unstable, that could materially compromise efforts to transform cells extracted from embryos into successful medical therapies. Finally, the research may be hampered because many of the existing stem cell lines were grown with the necessary help of mouse cells. If any of this research is to turn into treatments, it will need approval from the FDA, which requires special safeguards to prevent transmission of animal diseases to people. It is unclear how many of these cell lines were developed with the safeguards in place. This leads to a host of problems related to transgenic issues."
Ten Problems with Embryonic Stem Cell Research
Why do Libs immediately accept the talking points? I guess it's too tough to either think about the alternative or -heaven forfend- disagree with the click.
Nice to see one of you Obamaphiles admit you've given up any idea of rational thought.
Not sure what this has to do with the antiquated and obsolete ESC research that still has no funding, but since you haven't troubled yourself to read my thread where I discuss my views on abortion, I'll continue to allow you to look as ignorant and clueless as ever!Nice to see one of you Obamaphiles admit you've given up any idea of rational thought.You betcha.
Hey, did you also hear the good news that 17 year olds can now get the morning after pill? What a great day in America.
In Europe, it is sold over the counter. America needs to realize that the right wing is nothing more than the immoral minority.
It is not murder to take the morning after pill.
First of all, it was an executive order, not a bill. It was a work-around of the legislative process. Which is funny because, they didn't need to do that with complete control of both houses and the executive chair.
First of all there's no outrage, not even faux. Obama's XO is perfectly fine with me, he did it only to fulfill a campaign promise with no teeth. But you also have it wrong. What happened was, Bush was the first POTUS ever to approve funding for ESC research. They then came back to the trough, for many many billions more, and he vetoed it. Just like they hoped he would. Because they didn't really want the funding -- which should be obvious to everyone now -- they wanted a political football. Wanted to point to that veto and say "Bush is against science" and all that rot.First of all, it was an executive order, not a bill. It was a work-around of the legislative process. Which is funny because, they didn't need to do that with complete control of both houses and the executive chair.
Actually, it was UNDOING Bush's executive order, not legislative action. Bush went against the legislature by using his first veto as president to kill scientific research.
And why should a new president live with ignorant and onerous executive orders from a past president?
Your faux outrage is quite selective.
Your spoon fed ignorance shows once again!I am very grateful and happy that science has once again taken its rightful place in this country - right at the front! No body except the Right is talking about "embryo farms". The plan is to use existing embryos that would otherwise have to be destroyed. The other option would be to find an army of Nadya Sulemans who could be implanted with 8 embryos each!
